North America
Yahoo Finance

Why “VOO and Chill” Lost Money for 8 Straight Years: What $100,000 in the S&P 500 Did From 2000 to 2008

Warren Buffett says never bet against America, and younger investors have taken that advice to heart by piling into S&P 500 ETFs. But there was a stretch of U.S. market history that would have tested even the most devoted believers. This post may contain links from our sponsors and affiliates, and Flywheel Publishing may receive compensation for actions taken through them. But I’m seeing a different trend, particularly among younger investors who grew up during the growth and technology stock boom of the past decade: “VOO and chill.” Buy the S&P 500, keep contributing, and don’t worry about anything else. That approach has also been reinforced by prominent investors such as Warren Buffett, who has maintained a strong U.S. home-country bias and famously advised investors to “never bet against America.” The average investor isn’t Buffett, though. They don’t have his capital, investing acumen, or formerly very long time horizon. I still think “VOO and chill” is considerably better than picking individual stocks. But history offers several examples of where an all-U.S. portfolio could fall short, and the turbulent period beginning in 2000 provides a particularly useful one. The late 1990s produced one of the largest speculative booms in U.S. stock market history. Internet and technology stocks soared, valuations expanded, and the S&P 500 entered 2000 heavily exposed to companies whose prices reflected extremely optimistic expectations. Then the dot-com bubble burst. Technology stocks collapsed, the U.S. economy entered recession in 2001, and the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks added another shock. The S&P 500 suffered three consecutive calendar-year losses from 2000 through 2002. Stocks eventually recovered, but investors didn’t get much time to enjoy it. The housing and credit bubbles were already building during the subsequent expansion, setting the stage for the global financial crisis. By 2008, U.S. stocks were entering another major bear market. International stocks and bonds followed different cycles. International equities benefited from different sector exposures, currencies, and economic conditions, while bonds generated positive returns without requiring the U.S. stock market to recover. I backtested all three from Dec. 31, 1999 through Dec. 31, 2007, with distributions reinvested using Testfolio. The S&P 500 didn’t literally lose money over this eight-year window in nominal terms, but its 13.19% cumulative gain was tiny compared with international stocks and bonds. Remarkably, the bond portfolio almost kept pace with international equities. But inflation makes the results considerably worse. After adjusting for inflation, $100,000 invested in the S&P 500 proxy finished the eight years with eroded purchasing power of only about $90,696. International stocks and bonds, meanwhile, both produced positive real returns exceeding 30% cumulatively. The lesson I take from this period isn’t that investors should dump VOO for VXUS or BND. The winning asset class changes, and knowing which one will lead over the next decade is precisely the difficult part. That’s the rationale behind the three-fund portfolio. Instead of making one large bet on U.S. stocks, you own all three major building blocks.

Why “VOO and Chill” Lost Money for 8 Straight Years: What $100,000 in the S&P 500 Did From 2000 to 2008
Europe
The Guardian

​FTC and seven states seek contempt ruling against Shkreli over pharma ban

Martin Shkreli speaking to the press in 2017 after the jury issued a verdict in his case at the US direct court for the eastern district in New York City. Photograph: Drew Angerer/Getty ImagesView image in fullscreenMartin Shkreli speaking to the press in 2017 after the jury issued a verdict in his case at the US direct court for the eastern district in New York City. Photograph: Drew Angerer/Getty ImagesMartin Shkreli​FTC and seven states seek contempt ruling against Shkreli over pharma banMartin Shkreli’s 2022 release conditions bar him from participating in the pharmaceutical industry, including ownership stakes or business decisions The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and seven US states have alleged that pharmaceutical executive Martin Shkreli repeatedly violated a lifetime ban on participating in the pharmaceutical industry, and they are asking a judge to hold him in contempt. In a motion filed on Tuesday in US district court in New York City, the FTC and its state co-plaintiffs allege that 43-year-old Shkreli – nicknamed the “Pharma Bro” – has traded stocks in at least 60 pharmaceutical companies and publicly commented on their businesses since his release from prison in May 2022. Conditions related to Shkreli’s release prohibit him from directly or indirectly participating in the pharmaceutical industry, including owning stakes in pharmaceutical companies or influencing their business decisions. The FTC alleges that Shkreli publicized his activities through live streams and posts on the YouTube, X and Reddit platforms. During one live stream, he told viewers: “I’m showing you how to trade and invest in biotech,” according to the FTC. In another live stream, Shkreli allegedly revealed what he described as his “magic trick”, saying: “It doesn’t matter what trades I make because I can always find a couple of biotech stocks to smoke.” The FTC also alleges Shkreli used his live streams to organize public campaigns to short pharmaceutical stocks based on predictions that companies’ clinical trials would fail. For those “brazen violations”, the FTC’s court filing said: “Shkreli should be held in civil contempt and face sanctions to purge his current contempt and to coerce his future compliance.” The court filing said that should include, but not be limited to, “a complete accounting of his pharmaceutical company stock trades, divestment of any ownership in any pharmaceutical company, a monetary fine in the amount of Shkreli’s profits made through his contumacious conduct, and clear and escalating consequences – including additional fines and incarceration – for any future violations”. Shkreli’s pharmaceutical industry ban stems from a 2022 ruling that found he had conducted an illegal anticompetitive scheme to raise the price of Daraprim – a drug used to treat malaria, certain cancers and toxoplasmosis – by more than 5,000%, from $17.50 to $750 per tablet. That same year, a US court fined Shkreli $64.6m, describing his conduct as “egregious, deliberate, repetitive, long-running and ultimately dangerous [and] illegal”. “Defendants must fulfill their obligations” when a court issues an order, the FTC competition bureau director, Daniel Guarnera, said on Tuesday. He added that Tuesday’s filing against Shkreli “should serve as notice that the FTC will not hesitate to enforce violations of court orders”.

​FTC and seven states seek contempt ruling against Shkreli over pharma ban
Asia
The Hindu BusinessLine

Sensex today | Stock Market Highlights: Sensex, Nifty close over 1% lower; private bank, IT stocks push markets lower

Sensex Today, Nifty 50 | Stock Market Updates: Sensex settled 876.37 pts or 1.17% lower at 73,852.90, and Nifty 50 shed 257.20 pts or 1.11% to 22,888.95. Markets will remain closed tomorrow. THe majority of BSE sectoral indices were in negative territory, with the exception of the public sector banks index, which gained 2.6%. The private banks and IT indices were down 1.3% each. The top gainers on the Sensex were SBI (up 1.12%), Adani Ports (1.07%), L&T (0.61%) and IndiGo (0.24%). The laggards were led by Axis Bank (-3.85%), UltraTech Cement (2.82%), Infosys (2.72%), Bajaj Finance (2.54%) and Trent (2.43%). The rupee pared its initial gains and settled lower by 3 paise for the day at 94.92 (provisional) against the US dollar on Monday, weighed down by the sharp fall in the domestic equity markets and a recovery in crude oil prices. The rupee pared its initial gains and settled lower by 3 paise for the day at 94.92 (provisional) against the US dollar on Monday, weighed down by a sharp fall in the domestic equity markets and a recovery in crude oil prices. Rupee ends 3 paise lower at 94.92 amid domestic market selloff and firmer crude oil prices. Figures are Q2 FY27 reported figures. PAT growth is YoY. “Revenue” refers to Total Income for comparability. Figures are not adjusted for exceptional/one-off items; reported numbers are shown as declared by the banks. * K. K. Maheshwari will resign as Non-Executive Vice Chairman effective January 1, 2027. K. C. Jhanwar will take over from that date. View: Revenue and EBITDA exceeded expectations, but net profit missed estimates and volume growth was slightly below expectations. The increase in debt is worth monitoring alongside the company’s expansion plans and cash flows. Overall, operating performance was healthy, but the results were mixed against expectations. View: The launch could create a near-term revenue opportunity, particularly given the reported shortage. Actual benefits will depend on supply availability, competition, pricing and the duration of the shortage. Crude oil prices fell ₹52, to ₹9,342 per barrel in the futures trade on Monday amid profit taking by investors. Crude oil futures drop on profit-taking as global cues weaken, with November contract at ₹9,342 and WTI/Brent down.

Sensex today | Stock Market Highlights: Sensex, Nifty close over 1% lower; private bank, IT stocks push markets lower
North America
CNBC Economy

Why AI is both the hope and the hazard for world leaders, according to IMF chief Georgieva

SINGAPORE — The technology that investors and governments are counting on to lift the global economy is also adding pressure that threatens growth, the head of the International Monetary Fund said, urging policymakers to stop delaying painful choices on debt. Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva told the audience at a Wednesday event in Singapore that artificial intelligence is "rapidly becoming a key driver of countries' relative fortunes in the world economy." But the triple forces of AI advancement, soaring energy costs and record public debt are challenging the already "underwhelming" growth this decade. Speaking ahead of a series of IMF and World Bank annual meetings that kick off next week, Georgieva framed the global economy as being tugged in two directions at once: a "negative energy supply shock" from the war in the Gulf, now in its eighth month, and a "positive demand shock" from the AI investment boom. The combined effect, she said, is "highly uneven across the world." On the upside, global AI investment as a share of GDP will reach, and likely exceed, the amounts that went into building the railroads, electricity grid, or telecommunications network. AI hardware and related technology products already account for more than a tenth of world goods trade, she said. The IMF estimates that AI could add up to half a percentage point to annual world growth if done right. "Going from 3% to 3.5% over a decade — that is like adding an economy the size of ASEAN to the world economy," Georgieva said. But the benefits are likely highly concentrated. The boom largely bypasses economies less involved in the global AI supply chain, "increasing the risk of widening economic inequality across the globe," she said. The boom also feeds the inflation worry that has dogged policymakers from the U.S. to Europe and Asia. "The AI building boom is inflationary," she said, as are energy and food shocks, tariffs and defense spending. Oil prices have stayed above $100 per barrel as the Middle East conflict dragged on with few signs of a diplomatic off-ramp. Retail diesel prices also rose to record highs as refining capacity squeezed energy supplies. That inflation pressure flows straight into bond markets, as bond yields in the U.S., Germany, and Japan have surged to their highest levels in decades. Ballooning long-term private bond issuance by AI-related borrowers also competes with governments for capital, although part of the rise may reflect expectations of faster growth, Georgieva said. Global public debt is near its highest level since World War II and on track to soon exceed 100% of GDP, with advanced economies the "worst offenders," Georgieva said. For 17 years, governments had "a relatively easy ride" because interest rates stayed below growth rates. "Higher interest rates now put an end to that." The interest-to-growth differential is now "much less favourable" and "set to climb higher," she said, which means the growth needed to reduce debt ratios without fiscal effort is now "out of reach in the near term."

Why AI is both the hope and the hazard for world leaders, according to IMF chief Georgieva
Asia-Pacific
The Straits Times

Travel booking platform Klook Technology files to withdraw US listing

Klook joins a growing list of companies that have deferred IPO plans in 2026, including smart-ring maker Oura and nuclear services company Holtec. Travel booking platform Klook Technology on Oct 16 filed to withdraw its US initial public offering (IPO) plans amid market volatility. “Given current market conditions, Klook has decided this is not the right time to proceed with an IPO,” a company spokesperson told Reuters. “We will continue to evaluate the right time for a listing.” IPO activity in the US market has softened in recent weeks as higher bond yields, a prolonged restrictive policy outlook and geopolitical uncertainty have made investors more cautious. Klook joins smart-ring maker Oura and nuclear services company Holtec among a growing list of companies that have deferred IPO plans in 2026 as volatile markets continue to curb investor appetite for new listings. The Hong Kong-based company had filed for a US IPO in November 2025, and at the time disclosed a 24% jump in 2024 revenue to US$417.1 million (S$534 million). Founded in 2014, Klook offers bookings for tours, attractions, transport and other travel experiences across a wide range of locations globally. It competes with global platforms such as Booking.com, TripAdvisor, China’s Trip.com and South Korea’s Yanolja. “Our business continues to grow, with total experiences booked on track to exceed 80 million this year,” the spokesperson said.

Travel booking platform Klook Technology files to withdraw US listing
North America
CNBC Finance

Why a Starbucks takeover of Chipotle would — and wouldn't — make sense for both companies

Starbucks has reportedly explored buying Chipotle Mexican Grill, but investors are split on whether the megadeal would make sense for both companies. The coffee giant has been working with advisers on a takeover proposal of the fast-casual chain in recent months, the Financial Times reported on Thursday, citing people familiar with the matter. If Starbucks bought Chipotle, it would combine two of the largest U.S. restaurant chains. With about $31 billion in annual domestic sales, Starbucks is the second-biggest U.S. chain by sales. Chipotle sits in the number seven spot, with more than $11 billion in annual system-wide sales in its home market. The report sent Chipotle stock up about 6% on Thursday, while shares of Starbucks fell slightly after dropping more sharply earlier in the day. It is not unusual for deal rumors to lower the potential acquirer's value and increase the target's share price, but investor reactions show that a prospective takeover comes with pros and cons for each side of the deal. To be sure, it is unclear if Starbucks will even pursue the takeover. D.A. Davidson analyst Matt Curtis wrote in a note to clients on Thursday that he views the odds of a deal being completed as "relatively low" — about 20%. A Starbucks spokesperson told CNBC that the company does not comment on rumors and speculation. Chipotle did not immediately respond to a request for comment from CNBC. Before joining the coffee company in 2024, he was chief executive of Chipotle for more than six years. He led a turnaround of the burrito chain, helping it bounce back from a series of foodborne illness outbreaks that had turned into a full-blown crisis for the company. In the wake of Niccol's departure, traffic to Chipotle restaurants fell in 2025, as budget-conscious consumers visited its restaurants less often. These days, the chain looks like it is starting to get back on track, with signs of "encouraging progress," Chipotle CEO Scott Boatwright said on the company's earnings conference call in late July. Still, its shaky 2025 means that the stock is trading at a 20% discount from a year ago, even with Thursday's big move. And since Niccol left, shares have lost about 40% of their value. Chipotle would be a splashy acquisition for Niccol. More than that, it could create a new restaurant conglomerate, following in the footsteps of Yum Brands, Restaurant Brands International and Roark Capital-backed Inspire Brands. Multi-brand restaurant companies are more diversified, which can be more attractive to investors. While Starbucks is still a much larger chain than Chipotle, the difference in their categories means that one's poor performance could be offset by growth at the other. Moreover, Starbucks could help Chipotle grow more quickly in international markets; the burrito chain only has about 100 locations outside of the U.S., while Starbucks has about 23,000.

Why a Starbucks takeover of Chipotle would — and wouldn't — make sense for both companies
North America
Yahoo Finance

S&P 500, Nasdaq 100, Dow End Week Higher With Traders Eyeing Earnings Season — MSFT, NFLX, SPCX, ASTS In Focus

U.S. stock indices ended higher on Friday as technology stocks recovered from previous session losses and investors prepare for the start of earnings season next week, with big banks releasing their quarterly results. The S&P 500 ended Friday 0.6% higher, the Nasdaq 100 gained 0.5%, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average added 0.8%. The Russell 2000, which tracks small-cap stocks, ended 0.5% higher. Retail sentiment on Stocktwits for QQQ, SPY, and DIA was ‘bullish’ with ‘high’ message volumes. Equity markets touched session highs after President Donald Trump said Russian leader Vladimir Putin agreed to supply diesel through domestic and international channels. Crude prices—which settled slightly in the green, with West Texas Intermediate futures hovering near $92 per barrel and Brent crude futures topping $104—eased back in after-hours trading after the statement. SpaceX stock rose 1% after the Elon Musk-led aerospace giant disclosed an agreement to acquire nationwide spectrum assets. Conversely, shares of telecom heavyweights AT&T (T), Verizon (VZ), and T-Mobile (TMUS) retreated on concerns that the acquisition might intensify industry competition. Traders’ focus would now shift to earnings season to judge if elevated interest rates translate to better interest margins for banks or affect overall credit growth, and if strong tech results would be enough to impress investors looking for more than an earnings beat along with an overall robust revenue and profit guidance for the upcoming quarter. “I believe corporate earnings remain remarkably strong,” Bob Edwards at Edwards Asset Management told CNBC. Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) announced Friday the launch of a specialized artificial intelligence system designed to execute rapid, automated decisions, marking a strategic pivot toward lower-cost, highly targeted AI tools for enterprise workflows. Shares of AST SpaceMobile (ASTS) sold off Friday after SpaceX agreed to buy low-band spectrum the firm also wanted, even as CEO Abel Avellan said U.S. carrier partners already hold about 1,000 MHz that can be tuned to its satellites. Moderna (MRNA) shares jumped Friday, hitting a new 52-week high as the stock returned to the Nasdaq-100 and investors priced in a reported national push on cancer vaccines. Anterix (ATEX), NextNav (NN) and Gogo (GOGO) could benefit from rising demand for wireless spectrum following SpaceX’s (SPCX) reported $8 billion acquisition of Grain Management’s low-band frequencies, according to Roth Capital.

S&P 500, Nasdaq 100, Dow End Week Higher With Traders Eyeing Earnings Season — MSFT, NFLX, SPCX, ASTS In Focus
Europe
BBC Business

How long will humans be needed for translation?

"It's raining ropes," is the direct translation. It's the kind of idiom which can trip up an AI translator. "You can imagine the dilemma this throws AI into," says François Yvon, a research director specialised in automatic translation with the French National Centre for Scientific Research CNRS. He says a well-trained system will know that ropes are not literally falling from the sky and use the English phrase "it's raining cats and dogs". "But is it going to find the equivalent when it's translating into Indonesian?" asks Yvon. A comment on the weather is pretty low-risk, but more and more translation is being done by machines, and on topics with higher stakes than the weather. In April, Google said people are now translating, external one trillion words a month with Google Translate. That doesn't count the others: DeepL, Microsoft, Claude, ChatCGT and Gemini, not to mention made-to-measure corporate translation systems. Direct sales of machine translation, external (i.e. outside general AI subscriptions) were worth an estimated $1.4bn (£1bn) last year. "For plenty of use cases, raw AI translation is now the right call: multiplying your costs by 100 to catch the last few percent of errors isn't rational if you're translating internal documents or product listings," says John Zimmerman, founder of OKA (Open Knowledge Association), a Swiss non-profit that translates Wikipedia articles into other languages. "For an encyclopedia it's different. Wikipedia runs on trust. A wrong fact can sit there for years and get cited by journalists and AI systems," he says. With more than 10,000 published pieces, mostly into Spanish, Portuguese and English, OKA is, Zimmerman says, the single largest contributor of translated articles to the collaborative online encyclopedia. "Translating 10,000 articles the traditional way would cost millions. In our process, the AI produces the draft, then a human translator checks every sentence," he explains.

How long will humans be needed for translation?
Europe
BBC Business

Is it OK for jobseekers or employers to use AI?

Could using AI in your job application be ruining your chances of getting hired? Would you use AI to help you write a CV or cover letter? How about during an online assessment or video interview for a job? We are increasingly using the technology to help us with job applications, graduates, external and recruiters say, with many employers happy for us to do so within reason. But when does it cross a line from being acceptable to unethical, or even cheating? Tom, 22, from Maidstone graduated last year with a geography degree and says he applied for over 200 jobs before finally landing a role last month as a restaurant manager. He says the process was "exhausting" and "demoralising", with employers often not even getting back to him, and he wouldn't have got through it without some help from AI. "Employers want you to put your absolute best into the application, but if I'm applying for 10 to 20 jobs in a day, the reality is you can't do that." While Tom says he never used the technology in an assessment or interview, he did use it to help him with cover letters and CVs or to find the right "buzz words" that early stage screening in a recruitment process will pick up on. He also thinks it's "hypocritical" for companies to ask candidates not to use AI when some are using it themselves to screen candidates. "That's where it feels like a weird tightrope. You can't use AI too much because otherwise you're not human. But if you don't write like an AI, you may get skipped by the AI screening." This summer, the Institute of Student Employers (ISE) surveyed 155 of the UK's biggest graduate employers and found they were becoming "more accepting" of candidates using AI during recruitment "at some stages of the recruitment process". According to the trade group, the most commonly accepted use was writing cover letters or CVs, followed by completing online application questions.

Is it OK for jobseekers or employers to use AI?